# Comrade Clinton (!Achtung!)



## AbeScromsbie-cl (Jul 17, 2007)

Clinton announced at a cancer forum yesterday that she favors a nation wide smoking ban in public places. Our civil liberties will be encroached upon once this thinly veiled socialist ascends to the throne in '09.


----------



## Dogwatch Dale-cl (Sep 7, 2005)

We just can't let that happen!


----------



## GoinFerSmoke (Jan 1, 2007)

Burn her at the stake!


errrr...... sorry... go carried away!


Don't vote for her!


----------



## Architeuthis (Mar 31, 2007)

AbeScromsbie said:


> Clinton announced at a cancer forum yesterday that she favors a nation wide smoking ban in public places. Our civil liberties will be encroached upon once this thinly veiled socialist ascends to the throne in '09.


Enchoached upon? My individual rights may possibly disappear completely if that woman were elected. In all seriousness, I do have plans for shifting the majority of my funds off-shore and heading to Argentina if a huge national disaster were to strike. I consider Hilary to be a potential disaster of such a size...


----------



## Labman (May 27, 2007)

architeuthis said:


> Enchoached upon? My individual rights may possibly disappear completely if that woman were elected. In all seriousness, I do have plans for shifting the majority of my funds off-shore and heading to Argentina if a huge national disaster were to strike. *I consider Hilary to be a potential disaster of such a size...*


:lol:...no that there is funny stuff! Nice!!


----------



## JoeyBear (Jul 31, 2007)

I lived in Chile for a year and New Zealand for a year each and would go back in a heartbeat. If Hitlery becomes president, the citizens in this country are in for a lot of trouble.


----------



## BigBuddha76 (Mar 15, 2005)

time to start stocking gold

and dont forget the canned goods and shotgun shells


----------



## The Bruce (Mar 7, 2006)

She has a lock on victory. The opposing side can't field anyone who can top her.


----------



## Slow Triathlete (Jun 14, 2007)

I wouldn't mind a woman in office..........just not her. She rubs me the wrong way (not that way!!) I don't trust her at all.


----------



## brow78 (Aug 14, 2007)

AbeScromsbie said:


> Clinton announced at a cancer forum yesterday that she favors a nation wide smoking ban in public places. Our civil liberties will be encroached upon once this thinly veiled socialist ascends to the throne in '09.


:roflmao: Won't happen


----------



## JoeyBear (Jul 31, 2007)

Hasn't she already served 2 terms??


----------



## Architeuthis (Mar 31, 2007)

JoeyBear said:


> Hasn't she already served 2 terms??


She *should* be serving 10 to 20 for Whitewater...


----------



## shrtcrt (Jan 29, 2006)

WTF! Can we PLEASE stop taking away our rights. Don't smoke, don't watch this, don't do that. We are suppose to be a free country, but we are losing all of our rights. I really hope that NEVER happens. We need to focus on things that really matter and not fighting peoples right and business owners rights on smoking.


----------



## ilovecl-cl (Apr 30, 2007)

I dislike her ALOT!!!! (I kinda sugar coated that)


----------



## happy1 (Jun 29, 2007)

Talking about a smoke NAZI, pinky biotch


----------



## Shelby07 (May 1, 2007)

I have read recently that polls show 52% of likely voters would never vote for her under any circumastances (one can only hope.) But either way, tobacco and guns will continue to be political targets.


----------



## SMOKING HANDSOME DUDE (May 24, 2007)

Just for everyones information, she has not won any elections yet. If you do not want Hillary to be the next President than DO NOT VOTE FOR HER. Vote for someone else. It's that simple.


----------



## mrgatorman (Mar 23, 2007)

Theres already campaign signs posted around our streets...holy cow this will be a long campaign season.


----------



## Contessa (Aug 8, 2007)

shrtcrt said:


> WTF! Can we PLEASE stop taking away our rights. Don't smoke, don't watch this, don't do that.


Not entirely true. I mean yea, we can't smoke because those are HORRIBLE...but we're still free to watch as much sex, murder, and gore on tv and in movies as much as we want. We're still free, if not more so, to have sex with anyTHING/ONE that we want (and if they're underage..well...just hold still while I smack your hand, and oh yea, don't do that again). We're still free to repress any religion that makes us feel bad. And we're still free to fight for our rights..so long as we're a minority. If you're not part of the minority, well...that's just WRONG of you to fight for anything.


----------



## Corona Gigante-cl (Sep 8, 2005)

Isn't there a rule about this kind of thread? I mean, discussing a candidate's policy positions is one thing, vicious, ad hominem (feminam?) attacks are something else.

By and large, the smoking bans are a bipartisan issue. It's my impression that there are as many GOP legislators voting for these measures as Democrats. Feel free, someone, to prove to me otherwise.


----------



## northidahotim (Apr 3, 2007)

There are a few republicans who don't have any backbone and are voting in favor of the schip. But all of the dems are voting for the schip. It's not just the schip that scares me. It's everything. The dems would like to increase spending because they think they now how to handle our money better than we do. They will redistribute our hard earned money to other people the way they see fit. 
Here's what I see. When they finally get the taxes so high on tobacco and force everone to go to the black market or quit altogether where will they get the money to pay for all these programs then. Here they got these programs funded by tobacco. We are being assessed an additional tax for being smokers. I see coffee, unhealthy food, fuel. You may be able to come up with more. Can you see a coffee tax. They can say that big macs are putting a strain on our health care system and put a 40% tax on big macs. I'm sure there are far more studies that reinforce the unhealthy aspects of eating a big mac as opposed to smoking cigars. You see where this goes. How about violent movies. Every time someone gets in a car wreck should we tax hollywood. If the current trend keeps happening over the next twenty to thirty years that's what will happen, Now is that freedom? What amazes me is the same people who want to make smoking unaffordable or outlaw it altogether are the same people who will fight to let a teenage girl have an abortion without parental consent. I don't understand it. So let me know guys if I'm way off base to bring this stuff up on this site. We all come here as cigar smokers but may differ in our politics.


----------



## alnpd-cl (Jun 5, 2007)

GoinFerSmoke said:


> Burn her at the stake!
> 
> errrr...... sorry... go carried away!
> 
> Don't vote for her!


I prefer the first option, stick to your guns!


----------



## Architeuthis (Mar 31, 2007)

Corona Gigante said:


> Isn't there a rule about this kind of thread? I mean, discussing a candidate's policy positions is one thing, vicious, ad hominem (feminam?) attacks are something else.
> 
> By and large, the smoking bans are a bipartisan issue. It's my impression that there are as many GOP legislators voting for these measures as Democrats. Feel free, someone, to prove to me otherwise.


Ask the Moderators for an opinion... Personally, I'm exactly on the fence whether this should simply be closed or let it carry on.


----------



## alnpd-cl (Jun 5, 2007)

Corona Gigante said:


> Isn't there a rule about this kind of thread? I mean, discussing a candidate's policy positions is one thing, vicious, ad hominem (feminam?) attacks are something else.
> 
> By and large, the smoking bans are a bipartisan issue. It's my impression that there are as many GOP legislators voting for these measures as Democrats. Feel free, someone, to prove to me otherwise.


I was under the impression that one freedom we still maintain in this country is freedom of speech. I do not think that her gender has anything to do with the the very heartfelt opinions presented on this board. I don't care what the gender of a candiate is but when her views, which were clearly expressed, are completely opposite what I believe in I feel it is our responsibilities as citizens of this fine nation to make our voices heard. If we just sit idly by our rights will be steadily trampled upon until we have none.

Might I remind you that just 90 miles of the coast of Florida men and women just like us have been imprisioned for much more benign statements than those posted on this thread. As a matter of fact this type of board is probably banned in Cuba because a free exchange of ideas might lead to some free thinkers!


----------



## prophetic_joe (May 5, 2007)

Corona Gigante said:


> Isn't there a rule about this kind of thread? I mean, discussing a candidate's policy positions is one thing, vicious, ad hominem (feminam?) attacks are something else.
> 
> By and large, the smoking bans are a bipartisan issue. It's my impression that there are as many GOP legislators voting for these measures as Democrats. Feel free, someone, to prove to me otherwise.


Political discussion is against the rules of the forumn however it was the Admin that created the cigar legislation thread, IMO if the political talk centers around cigar or tobacco legislation and not just random political topics I would believe it to be open for discussion. I also don't find any of the posts to contain vicious, ad hominem (feminam?) attacks so i think so far we are in the clear. As far as being a bipartisan issue that is entirely inaccurate there are a few republicans siding with the anti-tobacco legislation but from what I've seen the majority of the push for it comes from the democrats. Of course this is all just a matter of my own opinion feel free to disagree all you like, that's the beauty of a democracy, enjoy it while you can the way things are going it doesn't look like we'll have one much longer.


----------



## Contessa (Aug 8, 2007)

northidahotim said:


> Here's what I see. When they finally get the taxes so high on tobacco and force everone to go to the black market or quit altogether where will they get the money to pay for all these programs then. Here they got these programs funded by tobacco. We are being assessed an additional tax for being smokers. I see coffee, unhealthy food, fuel. You may be able to come up with more. Can you see a coffee tax. They can say that big macs are putting a strain on our health care system and put a 40% tax on big macs. I'm sure there are far more studies that reinforce the unhealthy aspects of eating a big mac as opposed to smoking cigars. You see where this goes. How about violent movies. Every time someone gets in a car wreck should we tax hollywood. If the current trend keeps happening over the next twenty to thirty years that's what will happen, Now is that freedom? What amazes me is the same people who want to make smoking unaffordable or outlaw it altogether are the same people who will fight to let a teenage girl have an abortion without parental consent. I don't understand it. So let me know guys if I'm way off base to bring this stuff up on this site. We all come here as cigar smokers but may differ in our politics.


Wow. You have some really good points in there that I never thought about. Obviously if/when this cigar tax hike goes into effect, the market is going to waver, big time. While I'm sure some people will continue smoking, I think enough would go blackmarket or quit altogether that the tax won't fund as much as the government thinks it will. So yes, then where do they go? Onto to taxing other freedoms in an attempt to make us healthier 'for the children', oh yea, and the 19-25 yr olds who don't have insurance. I thought the government said we were officially adults at 18? Why are we being taxed to take care of adults under the guise of a CHILDRENS health insurance??


----------



## Cigar Diva (May 14, 2007)

Corona Gigante said:


> Isn't there a rule about this kind of thread? I mean, discussing a candidate's policy positions is one thing, vicious, ad hominem (feminam?) attacks are something else.
> 
> By and large, the smoking bans are a bipartisan issue. It's my impression that there are as many GOP legislators voting for these measures as Democrats. Feel free, someone, to prove to me otherwise.


Please remember that Hillary's "healthcare initiative" during her first term in the Whitehouse brought us (the US) our flu vaccine shortage a couple of years ago! I certainly want more of the same!

In Texas it was only because of the conservatives in the Senate (many none smokers) that felt strongly about individual rights that the state-wide ban did not make it to the floor for a vote.

Either party - FOLLOW THE MONEY!!!!!!!!


----------



## Tha Criddler (Jul 26, 2007)

architeuthis said:


> Ask the Moderators for an opinion... Personally, I'm exactly on the fence whether this should simply be closed or let it carry on.


*I think this thread should be taken down.*

I think it sucks and is exactly the kind of thing a ban on political debates is supposed to prevent. All this thread is going to do is get people pissed off at one and other for having opposing political opinions. Comments in it have already made me mad and changed what I thought of people who other than the cigars they smoke I had no personal opinion of. I think that sucks.


----------



## Architeuthis (Mar 31, 2007)

Well, unless one of you guys calls for the Moderators to make a ruling on it, nothing will be done at all. I'm certainly not going to raise the issue, it needs to be one of YOU!


----------



## prophetic_joe (May 5, 2007)

Tha Criddler said:


> *I think this thread should be taken down.*
> 
> I think it sucks and is exactly the kind of thing a ban on political debates is supposed to prevent. All this thread is going to do is get people pissed off at one and other for having opposing political opinions. Comments in it have already made me mad and changed what I thought of people who other than the cigars they smoke I had no personal opinion of. I think that sucks.


Interesting. I haven't found one thing in this thread to make me angry either way. I don't really care too much about ones political leanings I guess. I care about people being violent or racist but I could care less about who someone plans to vote for. I guess I'm just apathetic about this thread. I mean if Mrs. Clinton is anti-tobacco that is her deal and if it bothers me i just won't vote for her. I guess someone saying I'm not voting for a particular political party just doesn't twist me up too much. People are entitled to their opinions.


----------



## Corona Gigante-cl (Sep 8, 2005)

prophetic_joe said:


> ...I also don't find any of the posts to contain vicious, ad hominem (feminam?) attacks so i think so far we are in the clear...


The title of the thread seems deliberately intended to stir controversy.

Off-topic and incendiary...



architeuthis said:


> She *should* be serving 10 to 20 for Whitewater...


Unacceptable, IMO.



happy1 said:


> Talking about a smoke NAZI, pinky biotch


I agree that it would be good to be able to have a civil discussion about tobacco legislation, but unfortunately it seems that there are always those few who would prefer to start a political pissing match. Isn't that the reason for the rule against political threads?

Just my $0.02.


----------



## Tha Criddler (Jul 26, 2007)

Corona Gigante said:


> The title of the thread seems deliberately intended to stir controversy.
> 
> Off-topic and incendiary...
> 
> ...


I agree 100% and I contacted a Mod when I wrote my original post.
This thread is fine and dandy if you agree w/ everything you read in it and if you don't then the whole tread is a problem.


----------



## Shelby07 (May 1, 2007)

prophetic_joe said:


> Interesting. I haven't found one thing in this thread to make me angry either way. I don't really care too much about ones political leanings I guess. I care about people being violent or racist but I could care less about who someone plans to vote for. I guess I'm just apathetic about this thread. I mean if Mrs. Clinton is anti-tobacco that is her deal and if it bothers me i just won't vote for her. I guess someone saying I'm not voting for a particular political party just doesn't twist me up too much. People are entitled to their opinions.


I agree completely. I am quite surprised that this type of thread causes animosity or causes anyone to change their opinion of others. Unfortunately there are folks who do take offense, and that's why these types of threads are not encouraged.

As for me, I find differing points of view interesting. Who knows... I might learn something.


----------



## Stogie (Feb 13, 2007)

I agree that this is not only political because it is focused around smoking but now that it has crossed over to the point of mostly political views then I think it is time to close it.

I think most people had the chance to voice thier opinion on the subject. No one got mad so closing this at this time is what I feel is right.

Thanks for playing nice guys and no letting it get out of hand.

I will close it now.


----------

